A brief history of the only successful nation building exercises in US History

salemcoog said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

YellowSnow said:

salemcoog said:

YellowSnow said:

salemcoog said:

YellowSnow said:

Sledog said:

We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.

Disagree.

We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.

Fixed.

Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.

Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

Sound familiar?

Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.

And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.

salemcoog said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

salemcoog said:

CirrhosisDawg said:

YellowSnow said:

salemcoog said:

YellowSnow said:

salemcoog said:

YellowSnow said:

Sledog said:

We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.

Disagree.

We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.

Fixed.

Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.

Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

Sound familiar?

Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.

And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.

Your meltdowns are funny. And so very predictable. Continue on about the navy conspiracy...

Meltdown. Nah you're the king of those. You can consider yourself free to continue to lurk in the shadows of your own filth while the adults speak.

oregonblitzkrieg said:

RaceBannon said:

The Euphrates and the Tigris are the cradle of civilization

The cradle of civilization and look what they have become. The population that infests that area now are primitive, enraged primates incapable of living in peace with themselves, their neighbors and the world at large. They subjugate women because they are pussies who can't handle another viewpoint. They kill gays because they are closeted fags incapable of dealing with their homoerotic feelings. They can't handle criticism of their religion because they know that it's true. They know, deep down, that Islam is nothing but shit.

YellowSnow said:

Sledog said:

We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.

Sledog said:

YellowSnow said:

Sledog said:

We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.

No we went soft. We tried to win "hearts and minds". Total BS. We didn't want to anger the Chinese etc. If you are not fighting to win as quickly and decisively as possible you're fucking it all up! This theory of "limited" is from the leftists. Kinder gentler war doesn't exist. If they did this in WWII we would have lost or taken one hell of a lot longer to win at a far greater cost.

It's not the military that's soft it's our government and society.